Tuesday, January 12, 2016

'Free' Abortions Promised by Hillary Clinton

Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has, in exchange for the endorsement of Planned Parenthood, pledged to repeal the decades-old "Hyde Amendment" that restricts federal funding of abortion (except in cases of rape, incest and life endangerment) as “it’s just hard to justify” because “reproductive rights are a fundamental human right.”

“I will say, consistently and proudly, Planned Parenthood should be funded, supported, and celebrated – not undermined, misrepresented, and demonized.”-- Hillary Clinton

When asked if she would support congressional efforts to repeal the Hyde Amendment, Hillary Clinton wasted no time pondering her answer: “Yes.”

Restrictions like Hyde have had devastating consequences for women. According to data from the Guttmacher Institute [which is associated with Planned Parenthood], one in four women are forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term because they can’t afford a medical intervention without insurance.

But last year, House Democrats introduced a bill—The EACH Woman Act—to challenge Hyde and require abortion coverage under all healthcare and insurance provided by the federal government. The measure would also prohibit states from placing restrictions on private health insurance companies looking to offer a full range of reproductive health services, including abortion.

Opposition to direct federal funding of elective abortion is so strong that Democrats didn't attempt to repeal the Hyde amendment when they held the White House and overwhelming majorities in the Congress from 2009 to 2011. A 2010 Quinnipiac poll found that American voters opposed public funding of abortion by a 40-point margin--67 percent to 27 percent.

Although a President Hillary Clinton would likely face tough opposition in Congress to repealing the Hyde amendment, it may only take one Supreme Court appointment to accomplish that goal. Restrictions on taxpayer funding of abortion were upheld by the Supreme Court by a 6-3 decision in 1980 and by a 5-4 decision in 1991.

In 2009, Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a Bill Clinton appointee, said she was "surprised" the Court upheld the Hyde amendment because she believed "concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of" would lead the Court to declare a constitutional right to taxpayer-funded abortion. It would only take the replacement of just one Republican-appointed justice to give liberal activists a solid majority on the Supreme Court.

. . . not only does Hillary Clinton want abortion on demand up until the moment you can shake Junior’s hand; she also wants to force taxpayers, abortion opponents included, to pay for it. This is more than coercion; it’s public policy as vindictiveness, a taxpayer-funded middle finger at every person of goodwill with whom she disagrees.

Hillary is not the first Clinton to oppose Hyde. During his 1992 campaign, her husband promised to kill the amendment . . .

It’s worth noting that the Hyde Amendment is hardly a solution to the question of taxpayer funding for abortions. Money is fungible: The $500 million taxpayers give to Planned Parenthood may not [currently] be used to pay for abortions directly (according to the amendment), but that’s a $500 million cushion on top of which Planned Parenthood can conduct its slaughterous business. But at least the amendment recognizes, and seeks modestly to accommodate, people’s differences of conscience on this issue.

. . . at a New Hampshire event at which Planned Parenthood endorsed Clinton, the Democratic candidate embraced the reproductive health organization’s president Cecile Richards to the tune of Katy Perry’s Roar, and promised to the youthful and diverse pro-choice crowd: “I will always have your back.” . . . the events mark the latest stage in what is increasingly looking to be an explicitly feminist presidential campaign.

[Hillary Clinton] has chosen to take a stronger stance on abortion during this campaign [compared to 2008]. As a senator and throughout her career Clinton has supported pro-choice policies, but she has also come under fire in the past from pro-choice advocates for what they say is language that stigmatizes abortion.

Clinton’s past mantra on the procedure has been “safe, legal, and rare,” a formulation that suggests there’s something inherently wrong with abortion. Now, though, instead of talking about reducing the number of abortions, or insisting that they should be rare, she seems to be heeding the call of reproductive rights and justice activists such as Aimee Thorne-Thomsen, the vice-president for strategic partnerships at Advocates for Youth, who has written: “What if we stopped focusing on the number of abortions and instead focused on the women themselves?”